The Battlelog forums have a follow-up on recent indications that Battlefield 3 players were being unfairly banned from playing by PunkBuster. Word is: "Together with the 3rd party service providers we have taken steps to remove the faulty bans, and improve the protection against future fake bans. We have determined that the root cause resulting in the server bans is not directly related to Battlefield 3, but rather related to select 3rd party services which server owners can use in conjunction with PunkBuster to protect their servers" (thanks BF3 Blog). Further, Eurogamer notes that DICE is now looking to hire an "Anti-Cheat Administrator" to further their efforts at maintaining a fair playing field.

Well I told myself I would only break down the quoted bit sentence by sentence if you once again claimed I overlooked something...So here it goes:

Last night this guy would kill me every time even if I had already shot him numerous times spending most of a clip on him.

Okay we've established a guy is killing you every time even though you spend an entire clip on him.

He rarely took any damage when I was hitting him.

Not that he never took damage, he wasn't invincible. And when you say you're hitting him the only evidence to go off of is the indicator which isn't without it's own flakiness, but let's say it's working perfectly. Even then you can be hitting in the foot with every 5th bullet.

And the only time I ever killed him was when I caught him with his back to me.

Wait, so now you're killing him just fine? Ahh his hacks must not be active all the time, only when he can see you (disregard the other players).

It was as if he was hosting the server if you know what I mean.

So it was like he had all the advantages that playing with a low ping would grant you.

He had a clear latency advantage though his ping was between high thirties to low sixties.

Wait, so he had normal ping.

Also you have to take into account that if it was skill then why were his scores in line with everyone else?

Because he's a normal player?

If he was that good his scores should have reflected that but I played with him for hours and his scores never stood out he was just near the top ever time.

Oh, because he's a normal good player.

If you are out gunned by somebody good that is one thing but just being out gunned ever single time even when you had the guy dead to rights that is something else. What else is there besides lag? Hacks of course.

It's BF3, it's the server, it's the internet.

but for a couple hours straight?

I just got done playing a few hours of CS, some guys were incredibly hard to hit while others were easy. It's not because they were hackers, they were terrible. It's because they don't set their rates right, their pings appear normal but they skip all over the fucking place.

You conveniently over looked parts of my statements (as you still do) but it's all good.

No I did not.

Just because something seems odd to you or your doing poorly (sorry, generally speaking) is not evidence of hacking. Your example still reads like a parody and based on the text alone (obviously I didn't see this guy) that wouldn't be bannable.

You're suggesting that this guy has subtle hacks that work like this:Rarely take damage in frontal one on one gunfights, somehow play faster than the reality of networking allows, selectively allow self to be killed if damage comes from behind, keep a normal score to avoid suspicion (what?).